|
I was registered in New Jersey in 2004, and Kerry had the nomination sewn up long before I got to vote. Only a handful of states really got a genuine choice in the primaries in 2004, and nobody complained about it.
I had volunteered for Dean for almost a year, getting involved in March of 2003, before most people had even heard of him. I spent that summer working to build name recognition in New Jersey and Pennsylvania, and I spent winter break my freshman year of college interning in freezing cold New Hampshire for his campaign. I put my heart and soul into the Dean campaign, but I never got to vote for him. And I don't remember the Clintons or any other big name Democrats speaking up for my right to vote in a competitive primary.
I'm not calling for Clinton to drop out. I never have, and I have called out other Obama supporters who have done so. But if she was really so committed to letting everyone vote before a nominee was decided, why did she not speak up in 2004 when the media basically anointed Kerry as the nominee after Iowa? Why did she not speak up for my right as a late state voter (New Jersey was not until June back then) to vote for the candidate I believed in and have my vote matter?
I don't dispute Clinton's right to stay in this, and I think those who call for her to drop out are counterproductive. But is there anyone who has any doubt that if the tables were turned, Clinton would not be calling for Obama to drop out or treating him as completely insignificant? Is there any doubt that if the tables were turned, Obama would be a joke by now for staying in? Would Clinton really be championing the cause of letting everyone vote if the tables were turned?
|